Previews are necessarily positive because the media doesn't have access to the final game and has to take the developer's word. There's no opportunity to be critical, so they're just hype, but everyone knows that.
Reviews ensure that developers have a reason to make the game as good as possible. If previews drive sales too, then it allows developers to take more risks -- because an ambitious game that ultimately fails will have a good preview writeup and sell enough not to be a total loss.
The author is trying to posit an implied (but untrue) connection between previews allowing mediocre games to sell and all games 'sucking.' Mediocre stuff sells in every entertainment industry that exists -- if only the best games sold then the market would be too risky to enter.
The poster is asking for utilities that will help him discover the bottleneck in his gaming machine. He is not asking how to improve performance for a particular setup, and that is why he did not post specs for his system. He probably should have posted what OS he is using, but since this question is about gaming you can assume that he's using Windows, or at least has access to a Windows boot.
I wanted to clarify the original question because I'm looking for this kind of utility myself and was getting annoyed at everyone simply asking for specs.
It is not groundbreaking until you can use a flask of oil to light your head on fire and proceed to head-butt a troll.
Strange criteria...
Also, in Nethack, the use of items is still limited to what the developers have thought of. It was a few versions ago where saddles were available but you couldn't use them on Centaurs as they were "humanoids".
Almost every game is limited by what the developers think of, the only exceptions are truly successful simulations that have AI's that create situations themselves. Those are extremely rare (I can't think of a truly successful one off the top of my head) and usually this kind of 'innovation' is better spent on actually designing gameplay since AI this complicated is extremely difficult.
To be honest I am also kind of underwhelmed by how Nethack plays since I am not skilled enough to get to the level where the game system is supposed to shine. But even from what little I've seen the gameplay is a huge step toward open-endedness even if it doesn't completely accomplish it, and the game is an obvious inspiration to some of the most popular hack-and-slash games out today, which is a better measure of innovation than being able to light your head on fire...
What the heck makes nethack innovative? Its been the same character based RPG I've known since I took computer classes on a mainframe back in the early '80's. It was based on an even earlier game called Rogue.
I mentioned that it was based on Rogue, but it doesn't follow that it isn't innovative. Nethack is groundbreaking because you can do almost anything you can think of with the items in the game. It is innovative gameplay -- you've made the assumption that innovation necessarily requires the game to start a new genre.
Simply because a huge percentage of indie developers produce clones doesn't indicate anything about the potential of indie developers. The fact that most indie games are clones indicates that most people don't really want to do something new. But a good number of developers do.
Nethack (or, originally, Rogue) is made by an independent group and it's one of the most innovative RPGs made in the past two decades. True and groundbreaking innovation doesn't necessarily have to involve technical innovation. Yes, most of the innovation at this point in the industry will be technical, but there is a large amount of game design space left to be mined.
VGA Planets was a hugely innovative 4X game in the BBS era that spawned a number of indie clones, but it itself was produced almost completely by one developer.
A Tale in the Desert is an independent MMRPG with no combat, only a completely new system based on sociology, economics, and politics.
The reason we see less and less innovation in indie games currently isn't because they aren't being made - it's because the studio games being made right now are so good and are taking up so much of our time. I agree with the author that innovation doesn't necessarily make a good game, and the best games out right now, like WoW, are built on other models. But since this works so well, I don't see why studios like EA are more motivated to innovate than independents, who will keep innovating behind the scenes no matter how many Tetris clones are produced.
This is actually a pretty useful article illustrating the baseline quality parts for a working, lasting system. Don't fault the article just because a little bit more money you can get a lot more. There are diminishing returns to the amount of money you save once you get to budget territory, with bottom of the line processors and decent processors being only $20 apart.
Blue Ocean isn't a new strategy, and it has already been successful. Blue Ocean doesn't mean they have to open up a new market with every game -- they can build on the successful Blue Ocean franchises like Animal Crossing with very little risk.
Not long after AO came Star Wars Galaxies. Sadly the Star Wars part of the title was really the only great thing about the game, though it has since improved beyond its lackluster beginnings.
PCI Express only became widely available for AMD about 18 months ago. There are plenty of 939 boards out there with an AGP slot, and therefore plenty of systems out there that are AGP only and more than beefy enough to run a 7800 GS.
Depending on the type of game, cutscenes serve completely different purposes. Square games are almost interactive movies - lovers of those games play them largely for the plot and characters revealed in the cutscenes. Strategy games with cutscenes (ex: Alpha Centauri, Red Alert) have them serve mostly as a 'reward' for accomplishing a goal. That means they need not necessarily have a plot, but they have to be flashy and rewarding or else they'll be skipped every time. Still, there are better ways to reward gamers than with a cutscene.
David Jaffe seems to be talking more about Adventure/Action games like God of War and Mario 64, and I think he's right that immersion in those games might be even more important than in other genres. More importantly, though, the setting and plot of Adventure/Action games can be told through the gameplay, so cutscenes (especially those that cut away from the game engine) should be unnecessary.
But to but it simply, cutscenes in games are almost always less interesting than a good movie, and everyone not looking for an interactive movie would rather just play the game.
'Modding as the game' was the idea behind Quake 3: Arena. They didn't have a storyline mode, just simple (but good) multiplayer and bot deathmatch/team modes. They figured if they focused on the game engine the modding community would fill in the holes.
The problem with this approach is that modders gravitate toward games that everyone has already. That's why Halflife 1 was such a popular modding platform even though it really wasn't the best engine or modding platform. The original game was so good that everyone had it, so everyone would be able to play your mod. The best way to kickstart modding is by creating a game that everyone wants, so modding won't lead to many more skeleton graphics engine games like Q3A unless more developers fail to learn the lesson.
Simply because a corporation seeks to maximize profits doesn't mean it shouldn't keep the customer's interest in mind. It's in Sony's interest to keep the secondary game market alive so that PS2 console owners remain happy and come back for the PS3. But yes, this also obviously hurts the primary game market.
There's an obvious tradeoff here, which makes a console maker's decision whether or not to support or squash a secondary game market an interesting decision. Simply calling it "greed" marginalizes the whole conversation because it's obvious and insufficient at the same time.
HTML is difficult to parse because it is so syntax lenient. The point is that an XHTML parser can be much slimmer and/or faster than an HTML parser and therefore more suitable for portable devices.
Slashdot Mirror
Reviews ensure that developers have a reason to make the game as good as possible. If previews drive sales too, then it allows developers to take more risks -- because an ambitious game that ultimately fails will have a good preview writeup and sell enough not to be a total loss.
The author is trying to posit an implied (but untrue) connection between previews allowing mediocre games to sell and all games 'sucking.' Mediocre stuff sells in every entertainment industry that exists -- if only the best games sold then the market would be too risky to enter.
(as soon as i posted this the above poster posted the link to a bottleneck finding utility -- he was the first to do so)
I wanted to clarify the original question because I'm looking for this kind of utility myself and was getting annoyed at everyone simply asking for specs.
So Shadow of the Colossus is only 1/40th as complex as the real thing?
I want one of those to hang on my rear view mirror.
Hell, I've done that. And I think that makes this patent fail by the criteria of "obviousness."
Strange criteria...
Almost every game is limited by what the developers think of, the only exceptions are truly successful simulations that have AI's that create situations themselves. Those are extremely rare (I can't think of a truly successful one off the top of my head) and usually this kind of 'innovation' is better spent on actually designing gameplay since AI this complicated is extremely difficult.
To be honest I am also kind of underwhelmed by how Nethack plays since I am not skilled enough to get to the level where the game system is supposed to shine. But even from what little I've seen the gameplay is a huge step toward open-endedness even if it doesn't completely accomplish it, and the game is an obvious inspiration to some of the most popular hack-and-slash games out today, which is a better measure of innovation than being able to light your head on fire...
I mentioned that it was based on Rogue, but it doesn't follow that it isn't innovative. Nethack is groundbreaking because you can do almost anything you can think of with the items in the game. It is innovative gameplay -- you've made the assumption that innovation necessarily requires the game to start a new genre.
Nethack (or, originally, Rogue) is made by an independent group and it's one of the most innovative RPGs made in the past two decades. True and groundbreaking innovation doesn't necessarily have to involve technical innovation. Yes, most of the innovation at this point in the industry will be technical, but there is a large amount of game design space left to be mined.
VGA Planets was a hugely innovative 4X game in the BBS era that spawned a number of indie clones, but it itself was produced almost completely by one developer.
A Tale in the Desert is an independent MMRPG with no combat, only a completely new system based on sociology, economics, and politics.
The reason we see less and less innovation in indie games currently isn't because they aren't being made - it's because the studio games being made right now are so good and are taking up so much of our time. I agree with the author that innovation doesn't necessarily make a good game, and the best games out right now, like WoW, are built on other models. But since this works so well, I don't see why studios like EA are more motivated to innovate than independents, who will keep innovating behind the scenes no matter how many Tetris clones are produced.
This is actually a pretty useful article illustrating the baseline quality parts for a working, lasting system. Don't fault the article just because a little bit more money you can get a lot more. There are diminishing returns to the amount of money you save once you get to budget territory, with bottom of the line processors and decent processors being only $20 apart.
Three hundred and sixty script kiddies can read and write now? Uh oh.
But yes, fundamentalist christians that are also evolutionists have some pretty hairy questions to answer...
That's exactly the kind of misuse that the Red Cross is asking people to prevent. The Red Cross is a symbol of protection, not healing.
It should be put on armor packs.
Blue Ocean isn't a new strategy, and it has already been successful. Blue Ocean doesn't mean they have to open up a new market with every game -- they can build on the successful Blue Ocean franchises like Animal Crossing with very little risk.
Looks like somebody finally liked the NGE!
PCI Express only became widely available for AMD about 18 months ago. There are plenty of 939 boards out there with an AGP slot, and therefore plenty of systems out there that are AGP only and more than beefy enough to run a 7800 GS.
David Jaffe seems to be talking more about Adventure/Action games like God of War and Mario 64, and I think he's right that immersion in those games might be even more important than in other genres. More importantly, though, the setting and plot of Adventure/Action games can be told through the gameplay, so cutscenes (especially those that cut away from the game engine) should be unnecessary.
But to but it simply, cutscenes in games are almost always less interesting than a good movie, and everyone not looking for an interactive movie would rather just play the game.
The problem with this approach is that modders gravitate toward games that everyone has already. That's why Halflife 1 was such a popular modding platform even though it really wasn't the best engine or modding platform. The original game was so good that everyone had it, so everyone would be able to play your mod. The best way to kickstart modding is by creating a game that everyone wants, so modding won't lead to many more skeleton graphics engine games like Q3A unless more developers fail to learn the lesson.
Simply because a corporation seeks to maximize profits doesn't mean it shouldn't keep the customer's interest in mind. It's in Sony's interest to keep the secondary game market alive so that PS2 console owners remain happy and come back for the PS3. But yes, this also obviously hurts the primary game market. There's an obvious tradeoff here, which makes a console maker's decision whether or not to support or squash a secondary game market an interesting decision. Simply calling it "greed" marginalizes the whole conversation because it's obvious and insufficient at the same time.
HTML is difficult to parse because it is so syntax lenient. The point is that an XHTML parser can be much slimmer and/or faster than an HTML parser and therefore more suitable for portable devices.